Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00388
Original file (PD-2012-00388.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

SEPARATION DATE:  20040921 

 
NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXX                                                                     BRANCH OF SERVICE:   ARMY  
CASE NUMBER:  PD1200388 
BOARD DATE:  20121211 
 
 
SUMMARY  OF  CASE:    Data  extracted  from  the  available  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  this 
covered  individual  (CI)  was  an  active  duty  SGT/E‐5  (63J20/Quartermaster  and  Chemical 
Equipment  Repairer)  medically  separated  for  bilateral  knee  pain  with  early  degenerative 
osteoarthritis (OA).  The bilateral knee pain did not improve adequately with treatment to meet 
the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or satisfy physical fitness 
standards.  He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board 
(MEB).  The MEB determined that the bilateral knees early degenerative joint disease (DJD) did 
not  meet  retention  standards  and  forwarded  this  condition  to  the  Physical  Evaluation  Board 
(PEB).    Degenerative  disc  disease  (DDD)  lumbar  spine,  spondylosis  cervical  spine,  residual 
shoulder pain status/post (s/p) subacromial decompression of both shoulders, right eye corneal 
scar, hand arthralgias, varicocele, labile blood pressure, and onychomycosis, were forwarded by 
the  MEB  as  meeting  retention  standards.    The  PEB  adjudicated  the  bilateral  knee  pain  with 
early  degenerative  OA  as  unfitting,  rated  10%,  with  probable  application  of  the  US  Army 
Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy.  The remaining conditions were determined to 
be not unfitting.  The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated with a 10% disability 
rating.   
 
 
CI CONTENTION:  “Was told by the med board when I was discharged from the Army that VA 
would pickup all of these items on their ratings.  The med board told me that they could only 
med  board  me  out  for  what  was  on  my  P‐3,  that  was  my  knee.    It  is  inaccurate  because, 
20050110‐1st VA award of 60% overall rating.  I was not rated for my mild degenerative disc 
disease  L5‐S‐1  10%,  subacromial  decompression  left  shoulder  10%  and  right  shoulder  10%, 
cervical myofascial strain 20%, bilateral hand 0%, central corneal scar right eye 0%, gastritis 0%, 
bilateral small hydroceles 0%, onychomycosis right big toe 0%, degenerative arthritis left knee 
10%,  degenerative  arthritis  right  knee  10%,  labile  blood  pressure  denied,  and  residuals  from 
antimalarial medication denied.” 
 
 
SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The Board wishes to clarify that the scope of its review as defined in DoDI 
6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e.(2) is limited to those conditions which were determined 
by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military service; or, when requested by the 
CI, those condition(s) “identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB.”  The ratings 
for  unfitting  conditions  will  be  reviewed  in  all  cases.    The  listed  unfitting  conditions,  as 
requested for consideration, meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI  6040.44 for Board purview 
and are addressed below, in addition to a review of the ratings for the unfitting knee pain.  The 
remaining conditions rated by the VA at separation and listed on the DA Form 294 application 
are  not  within  the  Board’s  purview.    Any  conditions  or  contention  not  requested  in  this 
application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future 
consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records.   
 
 
 
 
 

VA (19 Days Pre‐Separation) – All Effective Date 20040922

Condition

R/Knee, RPPS
L/Knee Degenerative Arthritis
Mild DDD L5‐S1, L‐Spine
Cervical myofascial strain
L Subacromial decompression
R Subacromial decompression
Small central corneal scar, right
Bil hand overuse syndrome
Bil small hydroceles

Code 

5019‐5260 
5010‐5260 

5243% 
5237 
5201 
5201 

6099‐6001 
5099‐5003 
7599‐7525 

Rating 
10%* 
10%* 
10%** 
20%*** 
10%^ 
10%^^ 

0% 

0%^^^ 

0% 

0% 

Exam

20040903
20040903
20040903
20040903
20040903
20040903
20040820
20040903
20040903
20040903
20040903

RATING COMPARISON:   
 

Rating
10% 

Service FPEB – Dated 20040522 
Condition 
Bilateral knee pain 
w/early degenerative OA 
DDD lumbar spine 
Spondylosis cervical spine 
Bilateral shoulder pain s/p 
decompression 
Right eye corneal scar 
Hand arthralgias 
Varicocele 
Labile blood pressure 
Onychomycosis 

Code 
5003 
Not Unfitting
Not Unfitting
Not Unfitting 
Not Unfitting
Not Unfitting
Not Unfitting
Not Unfitting
Not Unfitting

↓No Addi(cid:415)onal MEB/PEB Entries↓ 

Combined:  10% 

Onychomycosis, R big toenail

7813 

Not Service‐Connected

0% X 5 / Not Service‐Connected x 2 (At separation)

Combined:  60%# 

*20% from 20060510, 50% from 200804522.  **40% from 20060510.  ***30% from 20080522.  ^20% from 20060510, 30% 
from 200804522.  ^^30% from 20060510.  ^^^10% from 20050413; # 90% from 20060510, 100% from 200804522.   
 
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  The Disability Evaluation System (DES) is responsible for maintaining a fit 
and  vital  fighting  force.    While  the  DES  considers  all  of  the  member's  medical  conditions, 
compensation  can  only  be  offered  for  those  medical  conditions  that  cut  short  a  member’s 
career, and then only to the degree of severity present at the time of final disposition.  The DES 
has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity 
or  potential  complications  of  conditions  resulting  in  medical  separation  nor  for  conditions 
determined  to  be  service‐connected  by  the  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  but  not 
determined to be unfitting by the PEB.  However the DVA, operating under a different set of 
laws  (Title  38,  United  States  Code),  is  empowered  to  compensate  all  service‐connected 
conditions  and  to  periodically  re‐evaluate  said  conditions  for  the  purpose  of  adjusting  the 
Veteran’s disability rating should his degree of impairment vary over time.  The Board’s role is 
confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB 
rating  determinations,  compared  to  VASRD  standards,  based  on  severity  at  the  time  of 
separation.    The  Board  utilizes  DVA  evidence  proximal  to  separation  in  arriving  at  its 
recommendations; and, DoDI 6040.44 defines a 12‐month interval for special consideration to 
post‐separation evidence.  The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40, however, resides 
in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the 
time of separation.  Post‐separation evidence therefore is probative only to the extent that it 
reasonably reflects the disability and fitness implications at the time of separation.  The Board 
has neither the jurisdiction nor authority to scrutinize or render opinions in reference to the CI’s 
statements  in  the  application  regarding  suspected  DES  improprieties  in  the  processing  of  his 
case.   
 
Bilateral knee pain with early degenerative osteoarthritis.  There were three goniometric range‐
of‐motion  (ROM)  evaluations  in  evidence,  with  documentation  of  additional  ratable  criteria, 
which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation; as summarized in the chart 
below.   
 

Knee ROM 
Degrees 

Flexion (140 Normal) 
Extension (0 Normal) 

Comment 

§4.71a Rating 

PT ~20 Mo. Pre‐Sep 

MEB ~7 Mo. Pre‐Sep 

VA C&P <1 Mo. Pre‐Sep 

Left 

130 
0 
 

10% 

Right 

130
0
 

10%

Left 

130
0
 

10%

Right 

130
0
 

10%

Left 

Right 

140  
0 

10% 

140
0

10%

Flexion decreased to 130 after 

repetition 

   2                                                           PD1200388 
 

The CI has a history of left greater than right knee pain since 1993 when he was diagnosed with 
retropatellar  pain  syndrome  (RPPS)  after  overuse.    He  was  seen  periodically  over  the  next  9 
years and treated with duty limitations, physical therapy (PT) and medications.  He was seen in 
orthopedics on 2 December 2002 and diagnosed with anterior knee pain.  Flexion was slightly 
reduced  at  130  degrees,  but  testing  for  ligamentous  instability  and  meniscal  irritation  was 
negative.  X‐rays of both knees were normal.  He was seen again in orthopedics on 29 January 
2003  with  an  unchanged  examination;  the  diagnosis  of  RPPS  was  confirmed.    Magnetic 
resonance imaging (MRI) on 24 March 2003 showed two subtle subchondral cysts consistent 
with  degenerative  joint  disease  (DJD).    A  possible  tear  of  the  posterior  horn  of  the  medial 
meniscus was also noted.  He was next seen on 19 September 2003, a year prior to separation, 
in  orthopedics  and  reclassification  was  recommended.    The  MOS  Medical  Retention  Board 
(MMRB) recommended MEB.  At the MEB exam, the CI reported bilateral knee pain.  The MEB 
examiner noted a positive patellar compression test on the right and positive patellar grind on 
the  left.    No  laxity  was  noted;  the  ROM  was  symmetric  at  130  degrees  of  flexion,  slightly 
reduced from the VA normal of 140 degrees.  The narrative summary (NARSUM) was dictated 
on 4 May 2004, 4 months prior to separation.  He reported constant bilateral knee pain and 
swelling aggravated by activity including walking more than three miles.  It was noted that he 
had been evaluated several times for generalized arthralgias without a diagnosis.  He was noted 
to be stable and to have early DJD of the knees that fell below retention standards.  At the VA 
Compensation  and  Pension  (C&P)  examination  on  3  September  2004,  3  weeks  prior  to 
separation, the CI reported that he could walk about a mile before the onset of pain and that 
there were no impact activities permitted.  Posture and gait were normal.  On imaging, the right 
knee X‐ray was normal and left showed early DJD.  Motor function was normal and tests for 
ligamentous instability and meniscal injury were negative.  He was thought to have early left 
knee DJD and right knee RPPS.  The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based 
on the above evidence.  The PEB coded the bilateral knee pain as 5003, degenerative arthritis, 
and rated it at 10%.  The VA rated each knee separately at 10% and coded them as 5019‐5260 
and 5010‐5260 for the right and left knees, respectively.  (5010 – traumatic arthritis; 5019 – 
bursitis; 5260 – limitation of flexion).  The Board noted that the commander cited both knees as 
impairing duty, that both were profiled and that the PEB determined bilateral knee pain to be 
unfitting.  Accordingly, the Board determined it appropriate to rate each separately.  The Board 
considered the different coding options available for the knee conditions; none offered a higher 
rating than the use of the PEB code 5003 for each knee and a rating of 10% for painful, limited 
motion.    After  due  deliberation,  considering  all  of  the  evidence  and  mindful  of  VASRD  §4.3 
(reasonable doubt) and 4.59 (painful motion), the Board recommends a disability rating of 10% 
each  knee  for  the  bilateral  knee  pain  condition,  retaining  the  PEB  code  of  5003.    After  due 
deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the 
Board  concluded  that  there  was  insufficient  cause  to  recommend  a  change  in  the  PEB 
adjudication for the bilateral knee condition.   
 
Contended PEB Conditions.  The contended conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB 
and eligible for Board consideration were DDD lumbar spine, spondylosis cervical spine, residual 
shoulder pain s/p subacromial decompression of both shoulders, right eye corneal scar, hand 
arthralgias, varicocele, labile blood pressure, and onychomycosis.  The Board’s first charge with 
respect  to  these  conditions  is  an  assessment  of  the  appropriateness  of  the  PEB’s  fitness 
adjudications.  The Board’s threshold for countering fitness determinations is higher than the 
VASRD  §4.3  (reasonable  doubt)  standard  used  for  its  rating  recommendations,  but  remains 
adherent  to  the  DoDI  6040.44  “fair  and  equitable”  standard.    The  CI  had  left  and  right 
subacromial decompressions in the year prior to separation.  At the 31 March 2004 orthopedic 
follow‐up, he was noted to be recovering well.  The CI was last seen specifically for the neck and 
back conditions 11 months prior to separation.  There was no evidence that the corneal scar 
impaired duty; vision remained normal other than a refractive shift seen in both eyes.  There 
was  no  diagnosis  for  the  hand  pain;  the  CI  was  seen  for  the  varicocele  6  years  prior  to 
separation; the hypertension was mild and did not require treatment; there is no record that 

   3                                                           PD1200388 
 

the CI was seen for the onychomycosis while on active duty.  None of these conditions were 
implicated in the commander’s statement and none were judged to fail retention standards by 
the MEB.  The neck was given a P2 profile a year prior to separation which expired 10 months 
prior to separation.  The shoulders were profiled as U3 11 months prior to separation and this 
profile expired 8 months prior to separation.  All conditions were reviewed by the action officer 
and  considered  by  the  Board.    There  was  no  indication  from  the  record  that  any  of  these 
conditions significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance.  After due deliberation in 
consideration  of  the  preponderance  of  the  evidence,  the  Board  concluded  that  there  was 
insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the any of the 
contended conditions; therefore, no additional disability ratings can be recommended. 
 
 
BOARD FINDINGS:  IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or 
guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were 
inconsistent  with  the  VASRD  in  effect  at  the  time  of  the  adjudication.    As  discussed  above, 
probable PEB reliance on the USAPDA pain policy for rating the knees was operant in this case 
and the condition was adjudicated independently of that policy by the Board.  In the matter of 
the left and right knee pain conditions, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating 
of 10% for each knee, coded 5003 IAW VASRD §4.71a.  In the matter of the contended DDD 
lumbar  spine,  spondylosis  cervical  spine,  residual  shoulder  pain  status/post  subacromial 
decompression  of  the  shoulders,  right  eye  corneal  scar,  hand  arthralgias,  varicocele,  labile 
blood pressure, and onychomycosis conditions, the Board unanimously recommends no change 
from  the  PEB  determinations  as  not  unfitting.    There  were  no  other  conditions  within  the 
Board’s scope of review for consideration.   
 
 
RECOMMENDATION:  The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as 
follows, effective as of the date of his prior medical separation:   
 

VASRD CODE  RATING

10%
10%
20%

5003 
5003 

COMBINED (w/ BLF) 

UNFITTING CONDITION

Left Knee Pain With Early Degenerative Osteoarthritis
Right Knee Pain From RPPS 

 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20120423, w/atchs 
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record 
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

           XXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF 
           President 
           Physical Disability Board of Review 

   4                                                           PD1200388 
 

SFMR‐RB 
 

 

 
 

 

 

 
 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency  

(TAPD‐ZB / XXXXXXXXXX), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA  22202‐3557 

SUBJECT:  Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation  

for XXXXXXXXXXX, AR20130000095 (PD201200388) 

1.  I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review 
(DoD PDBR) recommendation and record of proceedings pertaining to the subject individual.  

Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554a,   I accept the Board’s 

recommendation to modify the individual’s disability rating 20% without recharacterization of 

the individual’s separation.  This decision is final.   

2.  I direct that all the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected 

accordingly no later than 120 days from the date of this memorandum.    

3.  I request that a copy of the corrections and any related correspondence be provided to the 
individual concerned, counsel (if any), any Members of Congress who have shown interest, and 

to the Army Review Boards Agency with a copy of this memorandum without enclosures. 

 BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

 

Encl 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     XXXXXXXXXXX 

     Deputy Assistant Secretary 
         (Army Review Boards) 

 

 

 
CF:  

(  ) DoD PDBR 

(  ) DVA 

 

   5                                                           PD1200388 
 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00349

    Original file (PD-2012-00349.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the HNP C5‐6 and C6‐7, right shoulder subacromial impingement syndrome and the RPPS left knee conditions as unfitting, rated 10%, 0% and 0% respectively, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) for the first two conditions and the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy for the knee. The ROM was essentially normal on the NARSUM examination and, when documented, normal on other examinations. RECOMMENDATION: The...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00054

    Original file (PD2009-00054.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The medical basis for the separation was chronic low back pain (LBP) and multiple painful joints (Bilateral degenerative joint disease [DJD] of hips and knees as well as the left ankle) without any history of trauma. NARSUM (date 20020917): CHIEF COMPLAINT: This is a 26-year-old male with two-year history of bilateral shoulder pain, back pain, bilateral hip pain, bilateral knee pain left greater than right, and left ankle pain. The MEB diagnosis #1 (Medically Unacceptable) described...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02116

    Original file (PD-2014-02116.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Left Shoulder Pain Condition . He was then given a permanent profile.The NARSUM, dated 14 August 2008, documented focused examination of the shoulders that demonstrated normal right shoulder, tenderness to palpation of the left shoulder, no instability, and no evidence...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00053

    Original file (PD2013 00053.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA coded each knee individually and used the analogous code 5999-5014 asosteomalachia and rated at each one at 10%.The service treatment record (STR) contained an equal amount of documentation relative to the left or right knee with the majority of documentation pertaining to the bilateral knee pain with activities. The left ankle physical exam findings of dorsiflexion limited to 10degrees (normal 20 degrees).The C&P examiner documented that the CI had daily pain with activities in all...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00485

    Original file (PD2011-00485.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated the bilateral shoulder pain condition as unfitting, rated 10%; with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. The Board considered the evidence of the service treatment record and MEB examination, as well as the C&P examination at the time of separation. In the matter of the left and right shoulder conditions and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends a change in rating to 10% for the left shoulder condition and 10% for the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00613

    Original file (PD2011-00613.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    CI CONTENTION : “The Medical board concentrated on my Left Knee, but neglected to review my back, right knee, shoulders, feet, and head (migraines from airborne). The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation. In the matter of the left knee condition, the Board unanimously recommends a service...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00706

    Original file (PD2011-00706.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the polyarthralgia condition with chronic knee, ankle, shoulder and hand pain as unfitting rated 10%, with likely application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. The rheumatology evaluations never recorded any complaint of shoulder pain, and joint examinations by the rheumatologist were normal. ROM examinations at the time of MEB and the VA C&P examination proximate to the time of separation support the 10% rating adjudicated by the PEB.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00630

    Original file (PD-2014-00630.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Left Shoulder Condition . At the VA C&P examination, performed 16 months prior to separation, the CI reported a cervical spine injury in 1998 with continual pain accompanied by a left upper extremity radiculopathy. Based on the ROMs in the record the Board was unable to find a route to a higher rating.The MEB referred cervical spondylosis with C7-8 radiculopathy; however, the PEB noted cervical spondylosis “without significant neurologic abnormality.” The Board considered whether an...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01525

    Original file (PD2012 01525.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Left Knee . The Board noted that there was no pain on ROM testing on either the MEB or C&P examinations; however, both examinations made reference to tenderness about the patella and noted pain with activity implying painful motion. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication.As...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00346

    Original file (PD2011-00346.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI was then medically separated with a 0% disability rating. Right Shoulder Pain . In the matter of the neck and right shoulder condition, for a separation rating after TDRL, the Board unanimously recommends that it be rated as two separate unfitting conditions with rating, by a vote of 2:1, as follows: a cervical spine condition coded 5290 and rated 10%; and, a right shoulder condition coded 5099-5003 and rated 10%; both IAW VASRD §4.71a.